Curriculum integration in the junior secondary school
Jedd Bartlett
Abstract
The integration of curriculum has been of interest to educators since before the start of the 20th century. Today, an increasing number of New Zealand schools are embracing a variety of approaches to curriculum integration. At the same time, educational discourse continues concerning the constructivist approaches developed during the 1980s and early 1990s. This article1 describes a junior secondary curriculum integration programme, designed around constructivist principles, that has been running at Kuranui College in Greytown since 2000.
Introduction
There is a strong belief among those who support curriculum integration that schools must look at secondary education as a process for developing abilities required for life in the 21st century, rather than as discrete, departmentalised subject matter. In the debate about schooling in the 21st century, curriculum integration sits alongside a growing number of hot topics. When educators consider the full range of these approaches, the magnitude of the challenge becomes apparent. How does a traditional secondary school begin to restructure its Years 9 and 10 programme to accommodate all of these: authentic interdisciplinary contexts, extended periods of study, a range of learning styles, the development ofinformation and digital literacies, the fostering of autonomous learners, attention to learning through the use of information and communication technologies (ICT), and more?
The Base 6 programme at Kuranui College in Greytown was designed to incorporate, to some extent, all of these pedagogical approaches and at the same time implement some organisational and structural changes to the junior college programme. At the time of writing, the Base 6 programme operates at the Years 9 and 10 levels, with two classes of students at each level. The programme combines the English, social studies, science, and health curricula in eight extended studies spread over the year. Students carry out these extended individual or collaborative inquiry-based projects driven largely by their own questions and interests. The student-directed learning is complemented by lessons based on relevant content from the associated curriculum areas. The programme takes place during daily block-timetabled periods of up to three hours’ duration, with the remaining time used for the other junior college options and programmes.
Base 6 is named after the six key features of the programme: active learning through inquiry, independent student-centred learning, authentic contexts, collaborative learning, ICT-enhanced learning, and the building of connections to family and community. There is a strong emphasis on students developing information literacy and the competencies required for independent inquiry. Students are able to use ICT in their classrooms throughout the programme. The teachers in Base 6 work as a team to provide a flexible and integrated approach to teaching and learning, using a systematic process of planning and review to improve student learning.
Curriculum integration
Discussions by the Kuranui College teachers with teachers in integrated studies programmes at other New Zealand secondary schools, and research into curriculum integration undertaken during the programme development, identified several key theorists and practitioners. James Beane of the National College of Education at National-Louis University is an important figure in the field of curriculum integration, and has written many articles and books on the subject. His book, Curriculum Integration: Designing the Core of Democratic Education (Beane, 1997), provides a history and complete theory of curriculum integration, and was used extensively during the programme planning period. In New Zealand, Pat Nolan and Mark Brown (from Massey University) have published material related to curriculum integration since the late 80s, and have had a long-standing research relationship with Freyberg High School (Nolan & Brown, 2001, 2002).
Curriculum integration as a model for curriculum design encourages both teachers and students to explore, gather, process, refine, and present information about the topics they want or need to investigate, without being constrained by the boundaries of traditional curriculum subjects. The current movement toward an integrated curriculum has its basis in educational theorists such as Dewey, Piaget, and Bruner, who advocate a constructivist view of learning. The basic tenet of constructivism is that students learn by doing rather than observing—they are active rather than passive. There is an emphasis on the prior knowledge students bring into a learning situation, and constructivist teaching and learning often utilises collaboration and peer criticism as a way of prompting students to reach a new level of understanding. Metacognition and student-directed inquiry are emphasised in constructivist teaching programmes.
At its most fundamental, integration of the curriculum is concerned with the overlaps or connections among school subjects, and the creation of thematic units. However, an integrated curriculum can take on a variety of forms, with each approach implying a set of specific characteristics; curriculum integration, the integrated curriculum, integrated studies, interdisciplinary studies, multidisciplinary studies, and various thematic approaches to teaching and learning. A thematic or multidisciplinary approach is based on correlating two or more subjects in relation to an organising concept, theme, or issue, and is commonly used in New Zealand primary schools. This can overcome the problems for teachers and students (such as limitations on time) that are associated with fragmented programmes based completely on separate curriculum areas. Interdisciplinary curriculum design, on the other hand, combines disciplines to create new fields of study (such as art history).
Curriculum integration, as defined by Beane, is a departure from these approaches. It is a design that “promotes personal and social integration through the organisation of curriculum around significant problems and issues, collaboratively identified by educators and young people, without regard for subject area lines” (Beane, 1997, p. xi). Knowledge is drawn from the traditional disciplines, but during the school day students move between activities rather than from subject to subject.
In the development of the Base 6 programme, the concept of curriculum integration included: a combination of subjects; an emphasis on projects rather than lessons; sources that went beyond textbooks; the development of relationships among concepts; thematic units as organising principles; flexible timetabling; and flexible student groupings. The teaching and learning processes included the identification of an issue, topic or interest to be studied, the clarification of the knowledge and skills to be applied and developed (with programme goals set accordingly), the construction of learning activities, and the selection or creation of authentic tasks and assessment procedures. Teachers focused on helping students to develop essential skills intrinsic to their study and learning. Key skills may be to formulate questions, create hypotheses, work out ways to collect data, and report on what has been learned.
Ideally, the curriculum integration approach acknowledges that all the individuals involved in teaching and learning actively participate in the design processes and achieve consensus about what is to be done and why. When students are included, they are more likely to perceive the designs for their learning as relevant, interesting, and personally worthwhile. In summary, a curriculum integration programme is focused on active student participation and decision making, and aims to develop autonomous, self-regulating learners.
The New Zealand curriculum
How radical is curriculum integration at the junior secondary level in the context of the New Zealand curriculum?
Curriculum integration is not positioned outside officially sanctioned teaching and learning practice. Indeed, an investigation of The New Zealand Curriculum Framework (Ministry of Education, 1993) reveals just the opposite. In describing the seven essential learning areas, The New Zealand Curriculum Framework states: “schools may achieve a balanced and broad curriculum by organising their programmes around subjects, by using an integrated approach, or by using topic or thematic approaches” (p. 8). The essential learning areas are acknowledged as being “interrelated”, so that “any activity which students engage in will draw on more than one learning area”, and “in planning programmes, schools need to understand and make use of the connections between the learning areas” (p. 9). There is clearly an intention that integration across curriculum areas is to be included for consideration in teaching and learning programme design.
The New Zealand Curriculum Framework includes a set of principles that are intended to give direction to the curriculum in New Zealand schools. The three principles included below are sympathetic to the development of curriculum integration programmes:
The New Zealand curriculum provides for flexibility, enabling schools and teachers to design programmes which are appropriate to learning needs of their students. The school curriculum will be sufficiently flexible to respond to each student’s learning needs, to new understanding of the different ways in which people learn, to changing social and economic conditions, to national needs, and to the requirements and expectations of local communities.
The New Zealand curriculum encourages students to become independent and life-long learners. The school curriculum will foster the development of the knowledge, understanding, skills, and attitudes that will empower students to take increasing responsibility for their own learning. It will provide students with satisfying and worthwhile experiences, which will motivate them to continue learning throughout life.
The New Zealand curriculum relates learning to the wider world. The school curriculum will provide learning which students can see to be relevant, meaningful, and useful to them. It will enable all students to experience and understand the application of knowledge and skills to society, including the world of work. (p. 7)
Currently, schools must ensure that curriculum programmes cover all strands of the essential learning areas (other than English and mathematics) over at least a two-year period, and achievement objectives in these strands will be selected that most reflect their students’ learning needs. Schools are advised to balance their curricula against the directive to give “priority to student achievement in literacy and numeracy” and against students’ learning needs as identified through quality assessment information. Teachers should select achievement objectives according to students’ learning needs, and not just plan to “cover” them as a matter of course.
The New Zealand curriculum clearly provides for flexibility, enabling schools and teachers to design programmes that are appropriate to the needs of their students. Schools are required to select national achievement objectives according to students’ learning needs, and provide a programme that relates learning to the wider world and encourages students to become independent and lifelong learners who take increasing responsibility for their own learning.
The Base 6 programme
Students undertake two 4-week projects each term. Projects are centred on the students’ own questions, and involve not only searching print, electronic and video data, but also interviewing people within and outside the school. As a result, learning is more self-initiated, there is more reading of original sources, and there are opportunities for extended writing. Students ask productive questions, gather information of all kinds, reduce and synthesise that information, and then analyse, interpret, and evaluate it.
Base 6 teachers coach, guide, and support students more, and lecture less. Their role is a mix of teacher, guide, and facilitator. They teach and model skills, strategies, and attitudes, guiding students through the inquiry learning process and facilitating learning activities and discussions. Of key importance is the teachers’ capacity to arouse curiosity and guide it to a satisfactory conclusion, to ask the right questions at the right time, to trigger debate and serious discussion, and to be themselves models of thoughtful inquiry.
The programme covers four of the learning areas in the New Zealand curriculum—English, health, social studies and science—for 12 hours each week. The remaining periods continue to be used for maths, physical education, and the other junior college options and programmes, when the Base 6 students work with the other junior college students. Curriculum coverage within the Base 6 programme focuses on core concepts, and allows in-depth inquiry rather than a superficial coverage of large amounts of factual information.
The programme for the year is designed to provide equal coverage of the curriculum areas, and endeavours to include the major learning themes covered by the other junior college students. The nature of curriculum integration and student-centred, inquiry-based learning means it is unlikely that all the achievement objectives previously covered at the Years 9 and 10 levels will be covered by all the Base 6 students.
The programme divides the year into eight segments, and allocates eight broad project topics that encompass the curriculum areas. Each project has two of the essential learning areas as a major focus, and two as a minor focus. The achievement objectives for the major focus are used to assess the project as a whole. Each of the eight projects comprises a mix of independent student inquiry and curriculum-specific sessions. These sessions take a variety of forms, all designed to support the students’ learning and extend their experiences and knowledge in curriculum areas directly related to the project.
Inquiry
The inquiry process used in the B ase 6 programme is modelled very closely on Action Learning (Gawith, 1988). It involves six stages: deciding, finding, using, recording, communicating, and evaluating. Because the students tackle two inquiry-based learning projects each term, they get to know the process very well and learn to apply the various steps and skills independently. The skills specific to the inquiry process are taught, developed, and practised as part of each project. Each inquiry project also focuses on two essential skill areas, although the inquiry-based learning model provides the opportunity for all the essential skills to be learned, developed, and practised throughout the year.
In the first two years of the programme the Base 6 teachers found that students were not ready to move into independent inquiry, based on their own questions, until well into the first week of a project—if not later. The first steps of the inquiry process (brainstorming, mapping, and formulating questions) often had to be repeated two or three times before the students were motivated to carry out their own in-depth inquiry. If students are persuaded to go with inquiry questions they do not “own”, the time allocated to independent inquiry will very likely be wasted.
Rather than rely on a discussion followed by brainstorming and formulating questions for inquiry, teachers and students spend the first few days of the project sharing their existing knowledge and experience of the inquiry topic, and their ideas about existing resources—visiting a site or exhibition, displaying exemplars of student research, and holding seminars with visiting speakers. The aim is to immerse the students in information and resources relating to the inquiry area, so that when the time comes for them to begin their own independent inquiry they have a wide scope from which to choose a specific question or issue.
Once the students have an overview of the inquiry topic and an idea of the possibilities, they decide on their research questions, define their information needs and research strategies, and plan their inquiry. This process involves a series of strategies and techniques, including brainstorming, mapping (in which knowledge is shown diagrammatically), formulating questions and keywords, identifying resources, planning their use of time, and deciding on their likely product and audience. During this planning stage, teachers provide a great deal of support through casual discussions, formal checkpoints, and conferences with individuals and groups.
The teacher then continues to guide the students as they work through the various stages, providing appropriate support and instruction in the relevant information skills as required. With the development of autonomous learners as the overall goal of the programme, students need to be in control of the inquiry process. Their ownership of this process is critical so that they will be motivated to explore and learn in order to answer their own questions. Teachers use their knowledge of the students and the curriculum to help students make connections with their own interests and prior knowledge; they use open-ended questions to stimulate group and class discussion; and they ensure that students will have success with the questions they choose to drive their inquiry.
A student pathfinder prepared for each project is designed to provide sufficient support for less able students, while at the same time allowing more able, independent students to make their own way through the inquiry process. It has a section in which the students can record their inquiry questions, keywords, possible information resources, references, and planning details. The pathfinder is handed in at the end of the project as a record of the inquiry.
During the introduction and exploration phase of a project, students are given the learning areas and essential skills that will be assessed. Many students negotiate with the teachers to undertake additional or fewer achievement objectives or essential skills. They may wish to move outside the core achievement objectives for the project, or to focus more intently on one particular objective. At the end of the project, students evaluate their own achievements. Assessment sheets are stored in folders where they can be accessed by teacher and student and are available for discussion during student–parent–teacher interviews.
Feedback and assessment
In his analysis of international studies that investigate the effects of schooling on student learning, Hattie (1999) concludes that “the most powerful single moderator that enhances achievement is feedback”. He is referring to feedback that is based on an understanding of the constructions that students have made in their learning, and this includes reinforcement, correction, remediation, and diagnosis.
There are many ways for teachers to deliver feedback to students, and for students to receive feedback from teachers, peers, and other sources (Hattie, 1999). The Base 6 learning environment provides a range of opportunities for high-quality feedback, compared with the limited opportunities available in a lecture-style environment. By spending the majority of their classroom time sitting among and working alongside the students, the Base 6 teachers can more accurately gauge their understanding of information and tasks.
One of the mechanisms for regular feedback is the checkpoint system. Checkpoints are timetabled throughout each inquiry project and provide opportunities for formative evaluation. They can take a variety of forms. Typically, the teacher sits with a student or group of students and leads a discussion about their learning. Students are asked about their current tasks, what has worked well for them recently, and the new understandings they have gained. To encourage metacognitive thinking, students are invited to describe in detail some of the information skills they have been using, and to judge how effective they have been in applying them.
Goal setting is also an integral part of the inquiry projects undertaken during the Base 6 year. Teachers try to ensure that the students’ goals are specific and challenging, and that the students take ownership of their goals. Whenever possible, students are encouraged to set performance goals as well as task-oriented goals.
While exploring the theoretical framework for Base 6 during the planning period before the start of the programme, the teachers recognised that the emphasis would need to move away from traditional forms of assessment and towards portfolio and authentic or performance-based assessment. This was because, in the proposed learning environment, the learning process would often be collective rather than individual, with the emphasis on the construction of new ideas. This meant that alternative techniques for measuring performance would be needed.
Authentic or performance-based assessment fits comfortably with inquiry-based learning, where students are much more autonomous and therefore more likely to be involved in planning their own tasks and assessment procedures. Before the communicating stage of the inquiry process, in which students present their new knowledge, teachers and students negotiate a list of assessment criteria. This list is then used by the students for self- and peer assessment, and may be used by the teachers as well. More commonly, the self-assessment based on these negotiated criteria forms a cumulative record from which the students can develop personal goals for the next project and measure their own achievements over time.
Role of the teacher
Two important teaching characteristics in a learner-directed environment are flexibility and the ability to be reflective. Flexibility is crucial when juggling a number of different roles (instructor, learning manager, facilitator, model, guide, and coach). Teachers must recognise when to intervene, when to support, when to insist, and when to stand back. They must balance activities that construct knowledge with activities that help students develop the set of mental tools they need to complete tasks. As facilitator, the teacher manages the learning opportunities and activities in the classroom, facilitates class and group discussions, offers metacognitive strategies using authentic activities, helps students to make connections with their prior knowledge, identifies opportunities for incorporating critical thinking skills, and provides support so that students can concentrate on gaining the particular skills or understanding that a particular task requires.
Sometimes, when the students require guidance and training in a specific task or content area, teachers may tend towards the more traditional model of teacher as the giver of knowledge. More often, however, the teacher will be moving around the classroom, working alongside students, assisting and supporting individuals and groups.
The ability to be reflective is also important. When a learning programme has a strong pedagogical basis and comprises a complex mixture of learning approaches, teachers must have the ability to reflect, evaluate, and plan for continuous improvement. Base 6 teachers combine informal and formal reflective discussions during programme planning and review.
As well as juggling their various roles, teachers must also be able to manage many learning opportunities and activities at the same time, tolerate a noisier working environment than in a traditional classroom, and accept that students working independently outside the classroom or off campus are capable of accomplishing tasks in a responsible way. Teachers must also be able to assist students in the increasingly sophisticated use of ICT throughout the inquiry process.
Research
The Base 6 programme has been offered at Kuranui College since 2001, and each year around 50 percent of the Years 9 and 10 students have chosen to enrol in it. Assessment data gathered show that the programme has enabled students to develop the skills, habits, and attitudes required to become autonomous learners. Students have an understanding of how to learn, and demonstrate a high level of self-motivation, self-regulation, and self-confidence. They can confidently discuss their work and their learning with their teachers and peers, and will voluntarily revisit their work in order to improve their understanding or the intended outcomes. Teachers have found there has been more classroom time available for supporting the less able students, and they have been enthused by their new pedagogical knowledge and teaching experiences.
Data collected by college staff over three years and analysed by the New Zealand Council for Educational Research show that Base 6 students attended more classes than other students and were more likely to attend Base 6 classes than other classes (Bartlett, 2005). They also rated their classes in Base 6 more positively than they did their Base 6 classes in other subjects. Once Base 6 students reached NCEA levels, students who had been less absent in Year 9 attempted and achieved more achievement standards than students who were absent more often, and Māori students attempted more unit standards than any of the other groups.
There were few differences in NCEA achievement between Base 6 and non-Base 6 students, suggesting that a curriculum integration programme does not handicap students by watering down curriculum content. Vars (1965) summarised five major research studies and reported that in North American middle-school programmes that adhered to block timetabling and some form of integrated curriculum there was no loss of learning of subject matter and that, overall, students in the integrated programmes did as well or better than students in separate-subject programmes. The fact that teachers who plan and teach together have the same expectations across subject areas is a factor in the overall performance of the students.
There is also a body of research related to the impact of an integrated curriculum on student attitudes. MacIver (1990) found that students in an integrated programme developed team spirit and improved their attitudes and work habits. This was attributed, in part, to the fact that teachers met in teams and were able to quickly recognise and deal with a student’s problem. Vars (1965) also reports that motivation for learning is increased when students work on “real” problems—a common element in integrated programmes. When students are actively involved in planning their learning and in making choices, they are more motivated, reducing behaviour problems. Jacobs (1989) also reports that an integrated curriculum is associated with better student self-direction, higher attendance, higher levels of homework completion, and better attitudes toward school.
The Ministry of Education’s best-evidence synthesis reports (2003–2005) draw together the available evidence about what works to improve education outcomes. The report titled Quality Teaching for Diverse Students in Schooling: Best Evidence Synthesis (Alton-Lee, 2003) has produced 10 characteristics of high-quality teaching, derived from a synthesis of research findings of evidence linked to student outcomes. Included are numerous references to many of the elements that are essential to the Base 6 curriculum integration project, which should be of considerable encouragement to teachers working in the programme.
For example, “curriculum enactment has coherence, interconnectedness and links are made to real life relevance” (p. 5), and “students receive effective, specific, appropriately frequent, positive and responsive feedback”. The eighth characteristic of high-quality teaching states is described as: “pedagogy scaffolds and provides appropriate feedback on students’ task engagement” (p. 6).
It is also reported that multiple research literatures in different curriculum areas have identified the sustained higher achievement that occurs when teachers use pedagogical approaches that effectively support students in taking charge of their own learning. “Such approaches not only foster students’ ‘learning to learn’ and ‘thinking about thinking’ (metacognitive) skills but also support students in self-monitoring” (Walberg, cited in Alton-Lee, 2003, p. 78). Similarly, teaching students strategies to enable a metacognitive approach to curriculum engagement, thus developing student learning orientations and self-regulation, has been found to be one of the strongest approaches to influence learning outcomes (Alton-Lee, 2003, p. 78).
Summary
The Base 6 project is just one of a number of innovative curriculum integration programmes in New Zealand secondary schools that are designed to meet more effectively the learning needs of the 21st century student, based on the accumulated knowledge we now have about what constitutes effective teaching and learning.
To quote James Beane (1997, p. 103): “Those of us who advocate for curriculum integration believe that young people have a right to be intelligent, to be well-informed, to search for meaning in their world, to be engaged with significant issues, to do authentic work, to think critically, to form values, to make judgments and to be respected.”
References
Alton-Lee, A. (2003). Quality teaching for diverse students in schooling: Best evidence synthesis. Wellington: Medium Term Strategy Policy Division, Ministry of Education.
Barflett, J. M.(2005). Developing independent learners: The planning and implementation of an inquiry-based curriculum integration programme at Kuranui College. Wellington: New Zealand Council for Educational Research.
Beane, J. (1992). Creating an integrative curriculum: Making the connections. Curriculum Theory and Practice, November, 46–54.
Beane, J.A. (1997). Curriculum integration: Designing the core of democratic education. New York: Teachers College Press.
Gawith, G. (1988). Action learning: Student guide to research and information skills. Auckland: Longman Paul.
Hattie, J.A. (1999). Influences on student learning. Inaugural lecture as Professor of Education, University of Auckland, August 2, 1999.
Jacobs, H.H. (1989). Interdisciplinary curriculum: Design and implementation. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Lake, K. (1994). Integrated curriculum. Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory. Retrieved 8 May 2005, from http://www.nwrel.org/scpd/sirs/8/c0l6.html
MacIver, D. (1990). Meeting the need of young adolescents: Advisory groups, interdisciplinary teaching teams, and school transition programs. Phi Delta Kappan, 71(6), 458–465.
Ministry of Education. (1993). The New Zealand curriculum framework. Wellington: Learning Media.
Nolan, C.J.P., & Brown, M.A. (2001). Educating students in the middle: Getting it right with or without middle schools. set: Research information for teachers, 25–28.
Nolan, C.J.P., & Brown, M.A. (2002). The fight for middle school education in New Zealand. The Middle School Journal, 33(4), 34–44.
Vars, G. (1965). A bibliography of research on the effectiveness of block-time programs. Ithica, NY: Junior High School Project, Cornell University.
Note
1&;&;&;&;This article is based on a more detailed report, Developing Independent Learners, published by the New Zealand Council for Educational Research in 2005, and funded by the Beeby Fellowship, 2004.
Author
Jedd Bartlett has worked since 1996 as a provider of professional development in the ICT and information literacy areas. During this time he has also been a lecturer for the Auckland College of Education’s Information Studies Centre, and programme coordinator and professional development provider for Kuranui College’s inquiry-based curriculum integration programme. He currently works for CORE Education as an ICTPD National Facilitator.
Email: jedd@ihug.co.nz